Vance on Nostr: I think the concept of 'christ consciousness' vs 'christ the historical figure' is ...
I think the concept of 'christ consciousness' vs 'christ the historical figure' is important here. I don't think Hillman would disagree with Christ Consciousness as a divine experience people can and do have.
I think he'd disagree more with the historical record of Jesus the man as expressed through Roman era Greek Texts of which he is an expert on as well as the medical nature of those texts.
Specifically by authors like "Galen" ie Marcus Aurelius' physician and prolific medical write whose texts were used up until 1800s or so as far as I understand. It's these texts which when translated by him (some confirmation from someone else would be nice) tell you what a 'Christ' is as a specific medical term. Also, what an 'Anti-Christ' is. Think 'Dotes' and 'Anti-Dotes' instead of the modern Christian view of these terms. He's saying these are drug terms used by physicians of the era and even into Bronze Age Greece.
In Addition to all that what he's talking about should be verifiable by pharmacologists. If he's lying or translated them poorly it could be easily figured out by someone with Chemistry and Toxicology knowledge. No Greek required. Thats what I'd like to see. The closest I've found is his interview with Hamilton Morris but even his expertise may not be enough.
This is a very very nuanced topic and kudos to you for delving into it as you have but it will take years for it to be resolved either way. I'd suggest everyone just put a pin in it and save judgment for later.
I think he'd disagree more with the historical record of Jesus the man as expressed through Roman era Greek Texts of which he is an expert on as well as the medical nature of those texts.
Specifically by authors like "Galen" ie Marcus Aurelius' physician and prolific medical write whose texts were used up until 1800s or so as far as I understand. It's these texts which when translated by him (some confirmation from someone else would be nice) tell you what a 'Christ' is as a specific medical term. Also, what an 'Anti-Christ' is. Think 'Dotes' and 'Anti-Dotes' instead of the modern Christian view of these terms. He's saying these are drug terms used by physicians of the era and even into Bronze Age Greece.
In Addition to all that what he's talking about should be verifiable by pharmacologists. If he's lying or translated them poorly it could be easily figured out by someone with Chemistry and Toxicology knowledge. No Greek required. Thats what I'd like to see. The closest I've found is his interview with Hamilton Morris but even his expertise may not be enough.
This is a very very nuanced topic and kudos to you for delving into it as you have but it will take years for it to be resolved either way. I'd suggest everyone just put a pin in it and save judgment for later.